[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 187 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7063-S7068]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
______
WILDLIFE INNOVATION AND LONGEVITY DRIVER REAUTHORIZATION ACT--Continued
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the pending
business.
The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
House message to accompany H.R. 5009, a bill to reauthorize
wildlife habitat and conservation programs and for other
purposes.
Pending:
Schumer motion to concur in the amendment of the House to
the amendment of the Senate to the bill.
Schumer motion to concur in the amendment of the House to
the amendment of the Senate to the bill, with Schumer
amendment No. 3317 (to the House amendment to the Senate
amendment to the bill), to add an effective date.
Schumer amendment No. 3318 (to amendment No. 3317), to add
an effective date.
Recognition of the Majority Leader
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Warnock). The majority leader is
recognized.
Government Funding
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, negotiations continue between both
parties on a temporary extension of government funding. There continues
to be good progress, but appropriators are still working on finalizing
an agreement. Obviously, we are getting closer to the December 20
deadline. So time is of the essence for Republicans to reach an
agreement with us that we can act on quickly. Democrats will continue
working in good faith with our Republican counterparts on a strong CR
that will prevent a shutdown, while also delivering critical disaster
relief for the American people.
On the NDAA, last night, the Senate voted to advance the NDAA by a
strong margin of 83 to 12. The NDAA is now on a glide path to final
passage. Everyone knows this NDAA is not perfect, but it still takes a
strong stand against the Chinese Communist Party. These are things that
I have pushed very hard for. It boosts the use of AI for our national
defense--another thing I care a lot about--and expands tech innovation
programs for communities across the country--a third thing that is
very, very important and good.
It has many good things Democrats fought hard for. I am gratified it
has all these: the Chinese Communist Party, the use of AI for national
defense, and expanding tech innovation. Of course, it has some bad
provisions that we Democrats would not have added and other provisions
that we would want left out entirely.
I am particularly glad that this year's NDAA expands the Tech Hubs
Program I created with Senators Young, Cantwell, and others in the
bipartisan Chips and Science Act. These funds will transform
communities in Upstate New York, the Midwest, and across the country
into the next epicenters of innovation.
It also includes bipartisan measures on AI to expand our AI
infrastructure and strengthen America's edge against the CCP, the
Chinese Communist Party, in this critical technology--so important to
our national security and to the United States' technological
leadership.
I thank my colleagues from both sides for their good work on the
NDAA, especially Chairman Reed and Ranking Member Wicker. We hope to
send the NDAA on the way to the President's desk as soon as possible.
Drones
Mr. President, on drones, this afternoon, I will come to the Senate
floor to stand with Senator Peters to pass legislation I have
cosponsored to respond to the recent reports of unusual drone activity.
The FBI, DHS, and DOD--the
[[Page S7064]]
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Homeland Security, and
Department of Defense--support this bill. Our legislation will
explicitly authorize State and local authorities to conduct drone
detention and help them better coordinate with Federal law enforcement.
With the multiplicity of drone sightings and so many drones in the
area--many harmless, for recreational use, but many that there are
still many questions about--Federal authorities agree that they can't
respond to these incidents alone, and they need help from local
authorities. But, unfortunately, the local authorities do not have the
authority right now. It is only in the domain of the Federal
Government.
For all we know, the recent drone incidents are, for the most part--
or maybe all part--benign. But even so, in some cases, they can be
disruptive, like when they impact airport operations or approach bases,
and people are understandably anxious about seeing things in the night
sky without clear answers to what is going on. The people in New York
and New Jersey have a lot of questions and still haven't gotten answers
from the Feds.
The worst part is that, right now, local officials have very little
in terms of resources and oversight authority to do anything about
these incidents. So this afternoon, I will join Senator Peters to try
and fix that, and I thank my friend from Michigan for his good work on
this bill.
Tribute to Sherrod Brown
Mr. President, finally, on Senator Brown's retirement, this
afternoon, a beloved colleague of ours will deliver his farewell
address, my dear friend Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio.
If there is one statement that captures Sherrod Brown best, it is
this: Workers look at Sherrod and say, ``He is one of us.'' Workers
look at Sherrod and say, ``He is one of us.''
Now, elected office wasn't part of the Brown family tradition, but
fighting for justice certainly was. Sherrod says, and he has said it
many times--I have seen that smile on his face when he says it. He says
he inherited his activist bent from his mother, a Georgia native who
marched on the frontlines of the early civil rights movement. Sherrod's
mom taught him and his brother Charlie the power of political activism
and the moral duty we all have to serve our neighbors.
Sherrod got the message early. His first taste of politics came in
high school, when he was elected president of the student council.
Right away, he became a proud thorn in the side of the principal,
organizing anti-Vietnam war protests and pushing for racial equality in
the educational system.
During his senior year in college, Sherrod was recruited to run for
State rep. Admittedly, his parents weren't thrilled about his decision.
In fact, his dad told him, with a little tough love: I will not be
voting for you; you are too young.
Do you think Sherrod listened? Would anyone who knows Sherrod today
think he listened? Of course not. He didn't listen. He won in a
stunning upset, also typical of Sherrod. So at 21, he became a State
rep.
During those years, he would spend his Fridays not at home but at the
local union hall in Mansfield, OH, of United Steelworkers 169. He did
nothing but listen. He listened to the workers who dropped by before
their shift. He listened to them talk about their jobs, their families,
their kids, about the union. They would keep him abreast of the latest
news about strikes and reminisce about heroes in the labor movement.
They would talk literature together--``The Grapes of Wrath,'' Joe
Hill--that depicted the struggle of American workers and the relentless
drive to achieve the American Dream.
Those Fridays at the union reshaped Sherrod's world view forever.
They taught Sherrod one of the great truths about America: Our country
was built up from the middle class, and the middle class was built by
unions and union workers. My family knows the same thing. Everything
Sherrod did in politics from then onward was in service to this truth.
So when he came to Congress many years later, it is no surprise that
one of his very first votes was opposing NAFTA, fearful of the
devastating consequence it would have for Ohioans. Decades later, he
has brought back jobs to Ohio, helping break ground on some of the
largest manufacturing projects in the State's history, through the
Chips and Science Act. And we made sure--Sherrod and I and some others
together--that it will be done through union labor. I insisted on that
in the Chips and Science Act, and Sherrod was in my ear, making sure
that happened all the time.
Years before, we passed the ACA. Sherrod was also one of the leading
proponents for healthcare reform and expanding access. He famously
refused to get health insurance on his own as a Congressman and a
Senator until the day we passed the ACA.
On infrastructure, Sherrod was the relentless force behind the ``Buy
America'' provisions in the bipartisan infrastructure bill, ensuring
that America's roads and bridges and highways were built from American-
made steel and iron and concrete.
On pension reform--this is something we so much cared about--Sherrod
was the author and champion of the Butch Lewis Act, putting money back
in the pockets of retirees who faced the unthinkable prospect of seeing
the benefits dry up. It was so typical of Sherrod. It wasn't an
abstract idea for him; he knew the Lewis family. They came here and
lobbied. It was all about people, and then, working out from people,
how you could make their lives better and America better.
The record goes on. Sherrod is a leader for Wall Street reform,
saving U.S. auto jobs, lowering prescription drug prices, protecting
the right to organize at work, investing in apprenticeship programs,
expanding the child tax credit, protecting workers on the job, and so
much more.
It is amazing--amazing what he did. He was here 18 years, and it is
amazing what he accomplished for working people. It is a record that
anyone would be very, very proud of, and we are also proud of Sherrod's
record.
The common theme to all this is a phrase Sherrod has embraced his
entire life: the dignity of work. It is something he repeats again and
again. He has even named his bus tours on it.
And he also talks about the canary in the coal mine--that when there
are some bad signs coming from certain places about working people, we
had better all listen because it is the canary in the coal mine. I
think he wore a canary in the coal mine on his blazer every so often.
Finally, let me end at the beginning, with a quick and humorous
moment from Sherrod's youth. As a high school senior, Sherrod, one day,
got together with his friends Paul and John to organize a rally in
Mansfield to honor the very first Earth Day, in 1970. This is what he
did; he organized rallies. Some people went to ball games. Some people
watched TV. Some people went out to restaurants. Sherrod organized
rallies.
They expected a good turnout at this rally, but they didn't expect
1,000 people to descend on downtown Mansfield, which wasn't that big a
city.
As Sherrod described: We did this really cool march, and we had
really big crowds. But we got down to the square, and none of us had
thought about what to do when you get down there. We didn't have any
speakers. And so we said, ``Oh, shoot,'' and we just disbanded.
Now, he wouldn't--only in Sherrod's account he didn't use the word
``shoot.''
Isn't that a vintage Sherrod story? He never made that mistake again.
He was the speaker at so many of the rallies.
You know, I recruited--I knew he would be a great Senator. And when,
at first, he decided not run--he was a House Member in 2006. I spent a
lot of time in the House gym, and we spent time on the bikes next to
each other, panting and sweating, but also my convincing him that, with
his great talent and his great passion for workers, he was so needed in
the Senate.
I am so glad he decided to run because he has done so much and left
such an amazing imprint on this body.
So the story Sherrod accounts for, with his rally in Mansfield, has
always been who he has been--direct, unflinching, passionate; a man who
is warm and welcoming down to his very core, yet rough around the edges
in just the right way; a man who will shun an Italian-made suit in
favor of the Cleveland shop just a few miles from his home; a man who
can penetrate the
[[Page S7065]]
dense language of public policy but will always prefer to ponder a line
from the Scripture, from Tolstoy, Martin Luther King, or a worker from
whom he heard something; a man with a gifted mind but an even--and he
has such a gifted mind, but this is a true compliment--an even more
gifted heart.
Thank you, Sherrod, for everything. We wish you, Connie, and your
entire family our very best.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Recognition of the Minority Leader
The Republican leader is recognized.
Tribute to Stefanie Muchow
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, for many years running, a familiar
morning ritual has played out just a few steps from my desk here in the
Capitol. A lamp turns on, illuminating a shelf where an embroidered
pillow reads ``Not my circus, not my monkeys.'' Invariably, a cold Diet
Coke is cracked open. Perhaps a moment of reflection on Peggy Noonan's
timeless observation that ``the constant possibility of quiet revenge
keeps one peppy.'' Then my deputy chief of staff for operations, Stef
Muchow, opens her office for business.
Stef works at a busy crossroads. Just about everything time-
sensitive, confidential, or otherwise important that is headed my way
stops at her desk first, and that is by design. There is no one else
who can spend and accumulate institutional capital in my name with
Stef's confidence; no one else who commands such a comprehensive
awareness of my interests and priorities; no one else who embraces
``other duties as assigned'' with her unwavering devotion.
Now, this might sound like the sort of high praise any one of our
colleagues would hope to give to a close adviser of two decades. I am
sure it is what each of them would want to say about a bright,
instinctive, effusively patriotic staffer who finished college a year
and a half early and poured herself into public service at the highest
level. I don't doubt that each of our colleagues is fortunate to enjoy
the fierce loyalty to their staff, but I am quite certain that I am the
only one in the Senate who has been blessed by the furious loyalty of
Stef.
There is no portfolio--or more accurately, no collection of
portfolios--anywhere in Washington quite like the one I have handed to
Stef. And that makes sense because there is no one else who could
handle it quite like her.
Around my office, the bench in Stef's office is where colleagues come
for guidance and gut checks. Across the entire Senate, any number of
people can think of times when it was Stef's wisdom, discretion,
candor, loyalty, diplomacy, tact, or political savvy that made all the
difference. I can think of hundreds.
No one else sees the whole board--from policy objectives, to
political considerations, to protocol sensitivities, to personal
circumstances--like Stef does. That may have something to do with the
fact that she has seen my Senate office operations from just about
every vantage point over the years.
For Stef, there has been no task too small, no job that wasn't worth
doing right. As it turns out, this approach has been contagious. Stef's
role so often demands uncompromising efficiency and the utmost
discretion, and yet she still seems to seize every opportunity to bring
the McTeam closer together as family.
Of course, Stef's other duties as assigned include covering much
larger groups than the professionals I am proud to call my staff. In
every corner of the building, her name is synonymous with mastery of
the ceremonial protocols that transform the Capitol into a national
stage. This is the place where America inaugurates our Presidents, bids
farewell to fallen heroes, and bestows our highest honors, and very
little of it takes place without Stef's knowledge, input,
orchestration, or blessing. When you think about it, this diplomatic
grace and eye for detail make sense coming from someone who probably
hasn't missed a British royal wedding or an Olympic opening ceremony in
her entire life. Don't worry--Stef cheers for Team USA, loud and proud.
But I would be remiss in talking about grace without mentioning the
ways she has shown it in the face of the most demanding challenges we
have seen together.
When the pandemic arrived, Stef's ability to balance sensitive
considerations and competing interests was invaluable--not just to me
but to the entire Senate. Her approach to big, thorny questions about
protecting Senators and staff while upholding our duties helped us make
the right calls when there were any number of ways to make the wrong
ones. In truly unchartered territory, Stef's poise was decisive. As
leaders across the institution faced a blank page and a daunting, once-
in-a-century task, she took action--not because it would be easy but
because it had to be done.
For years, this has been something of a theme: If it had to be done,
it had to be Stef. If it had to be airtight and discreet, it had to be
Stef. If it had to navigate political and personal sensitivities just
right, it had to be Stef.
In this job, it is important to have a few people around you who
really do know every aspect of your life, who you can trust without
question, who will guard your confidences, and who will give you honest
feedback. I am tremendously fortunate and proud of the countless ways
Stef rises to these responsibilities over and over again.
But I am hardly the only one who gets to take pride in what Stef has
accomplished. I share that distinction with the family who makes Stef
who she is today--with her parents Gary and Dianne, her sisters Abbey
and Leslie, and with the ones she rushes home to when the immense
demands of the Senate grant a brief respite: her husband Scott and
their beloved daughter Lily.
I am not sure my words here can ever begin to capture the
significance of the first and last person I speak to every day, but
there is perhaps no better illustration of Stef's love for our country
and for the Senate than her sacrifice of time with the ones she loves
the most.
So, to Stef, I am so grateful to you for everything you have done
both for the Senate and for me.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican whip.
Senate Calendar 2025
Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, my office recently released the 2025 Senate
Calendar. As everyone now knows, our schedule next year will be
aggressive: Friday votes will be the norm, and we are not going to be
having much in the way of recess in the first 100 days. That is because
we have a lot of work to do, and we are not going to get it done on the
kind of abbreviated schedule that we have had in 2024.
One of our first priorities, of course, will be confirming President
Trump's nominees. The American people handed President Trump and Vice
President-elect Vance a decisive mandate in November. We are going to
honor that mandate by making sure that President Trump has the people
he needs in place as soon as possible, starting with the heads of the
Cabinet Departments.
Democrats can certainly make the schedule a little less painful if
they accord the President some of the deference the Republicans
accorded to Cabinet nominees under President Obama. But one way or
another, we are going to get the job done, and if that means some
nights and weekends, so be it.
Our other early priority--and another reason the schedule will be
particularly aggressive in the first 100 days--is to pass a
reconciliation package with a once-in-a-generation investment in border
security and immigration enforcement. The border and enforcement crisis
under President Biden has left a gaping hole in our national security
and undermined respect for the rule of law. And that ends in January.
Enforcing the law and protecting the integrity of our borders will
become administration policy on day one, and the Senate will move
quickly to back up the President's efforts.
The package we will be taking up will, among other things, include
substantial resources to increase the number of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement officers and Border Patrol agents, increase detention
space, and provide the barriers and technology we need to fully secure
the border.
[[Page S7066]]
It will also focus on other key national security priorities, like
addressing our lagging military readiness.
Other priorities for the first 100 days include kicking off our
efforts to use the Congressional Review Act to undo some of the Biden
administration regulations that are weighing down our economy and, of
course, continuing work on our reconciliation package to extend the tax
relief Republicans delivered for Americans during the first Trump
administration.
I mentioned our national security priorities, and let me just say
that national security is going to be a priority for Republicans
throughout the year. We are finally now considering the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 here in the Senate this
week--almost 3 months into the new fiscal year. Under Republican
leadership, the NDAA will not be put on the back burner.
I am also committed to ensuring that we return to the regular-order
consideration of appropriations bills. I will devote extensive time to
the floor consideration of appropriations bills when they are ready in
order to avoid an end-of-the-year pileup and problematic continuing
resolutions, something with which, right now, we are very familiar.
Deciding how taxpayer money is spent is a serious responsibility, and
it deserves serious floor time. Members should plan to take a lot of
amendment votes during this process and throughout the year. That will
mean taking tough votes at times, but that, folks, is what we were sent
here to do.
Finally, Members should expect to take up a farm bill in 2025. We are
now more than a year overdue on the next bill, and farmers and ranchers
in my State and around the country are waiting for Washington to update
farm programs to reflect current agriculture needs, and I am committed
to bringing a bill to the floor in the coming year.
There are no two ways about it--2025 will be intense, but we have a
real opportunity here to deliver for the American people on continued
tax relief, on border security, on national security, and beyond. We
are going to seize the day.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Padilla). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
H.R. 5009
Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the National
Defense Authorization Act--a position I do not take lightly.
I have supported the final passage of each NDAA that has come before
me in the Senate up until now. From my tenure in this body and well
before me, there has been a productive bipartisan tradition when it
comes to this bill that authorizes funding for our military, supporting
those in uniform, and keeping our country safe. Most years, we come
together on a very quintessential country-over-party deal--one that I
would argue is all too uncommon; but, still, this was an important
annual ritual that carried serious consequences.
This is not to say that we do not have our differences. Of course, we
do. But we know our commitment is bigger than those differences. This
year, that commitment to our servicemembers, to the people we all
represent, and to our security and safety was broken. It has been
broken because some Republicans decided that gutting the rights of our
servicemembers to score cheap political points was more worthy.
Let's be clear. We are talking about parents who are serving our
country in uniform having the right to consult with their family's
doctor and get the healthcare they want and need for their transgender
children. That is it. They want the right to get whatever healthcare is
best for their child--something I imagine all parents want.
The healthcare we are talking about here can sometimes be lifesaving.
Some folks estimate that this will impact between 6,000 and 7,000
families in the military. I, for one, trust these servicemembers and
their families to make their own decisions about healthcare without
politicians butting in. It is flatout wrong to put this provision in
this bill and take away a servicemember's freedom to make that decision
for their families.
Look, this problem has a solution--a simple one, at that. My
amendment would strike this provision that guts our servicemembers'
rights. And I was glad to have 20 colleagues join me in supporting it.
We should pass it.
It is unfortunate that some of our colleagues decided to force this
harmful provision in this National Defense Authorization Act because,
otherwise, I would have been proud to support it.
This bill has some great things for our servicemembers, my home State
of Wisconsin, and measures that I have long pushed for. This bill
invests in our most valuable asset: our people. I am thrilled to see
that we are giving our junior enlisted troops a well-deserved pay
raise--more than 14 percent--and boosting pay for all others by nearly
5 percent.
This legislation invests in the health and well-being of our troops
and their families, eliminating copays for contraception for our troops
and their families on TRICARE, making tele-mental health care services
available regardless of where the patient is, and so much more.
A longstanding priority of mine in this bill and beyond is ensuring
that when we use taxpayer dollars, we are supporting American companies
and American workers and the American economy. When it comes to our
national defense, this notion is essential for our safety and security.
That is why I am glad to see steps forward in supporting the made-in-
America economy.
The NDAA puts strategies in place to make sure that we are sourcing
things domestically, from high-tech batteries to Navy warships. These
suppliers are not only providing the highest quality products but are
also creating and supporting good-paying jobs across the country--and
Wisconsin is home to many of them. Whether it be the iconic companies
like Fairbanks Morse or Oshkosh Defense or military installations like
Fort McCoy, Wisconsin is crucial in our country's defense, and I am
excited to see that this bill recognizes our contribution, making sound
investments in the Wisconsin Rapids Army National Guard Readiness
Center to support the training our troops need to stay ahead of
tomorrow's threats.
Despite all of the common ground we have found and all of the smart
investments we are making in our troops, their families, and our
security, some folks poisoned this bill and turned their backs on those
in service and the people we represent.
This bill should embody the best of us as elected officials, coming
together without partisan agendas to keep our country safe and support
those in uniform. Sadly, that is not what happened. In turn, if we pass
this bill as is, we are going to rip away the rights of our
servicemembers to get the healthcare they want for themselves and their
children. It is wrong, and I encourage my colleagues to vote no.
I am delighted this morning to be joined by colleagues who share
these concerns and would yield to Senator Kim for his remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
Mr. KIM. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleagues to call
for section 708 of the NDAA to be removed from the final bill.
As you know, I am new to the U.S. Senate. I come to the floor today
with great humility but also great urgency because, while I am new to
the U.S. Senate, I have had the honor of serving the past 6 years as a
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives, just on the other side of
this building.
During my time as a Member of the House, one of the things I have
been most proud to work on is issues involving our military
servicemembers and their families. As a House Member, I represented
Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, the only triservice joint base in the
country. Because of that, I represented tens of thousands of military
families who signed up to serve our country.
When you talk to military families, the last thing you hear about is
politics. In fact, the last thing they want to talk about is politics.
Military families often struggle with sufficient housing or putting
food on the table. They
[[Page S7067]]
face inadequacies in healthcare. Military spouses often face barriers
to finding work. While it is only the servicemember who swears the
oath, it is the whole family that serves.
I come to the floor with great urgency because Speaker Johnson sought
to politicize this important National Defense Authorization Act by
inserting a dangerous provision after the Armed Services Committees in
both the House and the Senate came to bipartisan agreement. This kind
of action undermines trust in negotiations and sets a dangerous
precedent for what is widely considered the last true space of
traditional bipartisan legislation.
Let's be clear. Section 708 would harm those who serve by denying
healthcare for military families. By banning TRICARE from covering
gender-affirming care for minors, we are standing in the way of
military families and the healthcare their doctors have prescribed. We
are putting politics into a bill where it simply does not belong. We
are sending a signal to our military families that if your loved ones
are transgender, we don't have your backs or theirs.
As the former ranking member of the Military Personnel Subcommittee
on the House Armed Services Committee, there is a lot about this
National Defense Authorization Act to support. Our junior enlisted
servicemembers will receive a 14.5-percent pay raise, and all others
will receive a 4.5-percent pay raise. Our servicemembers will have
greater access to meal support so we can address hunger in our ranks.
They will have additional funding to improve military construction of
housing so they will have better roofs over their heads. And we have
made real progress in improving access to healthcare.
These are all wins we should be proud of. They are bipartisan. They
build a stronger national defense. That is all the more reason to strip
this harmful provision, section 708, from the bill.
We shouldn't play politics with our national security. We shouldn't
target transgender youth and further spread fear into a community that
has seen so much hate directed toward it. We should pass an NDAA that
supports our servicemembers and their families--all of them--without
politics or prejudice. I hope my colleagues join me to that end.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I rise today to acknowledge the work we
have done on a bipartisan basis to draft this year's National Defense
Authorization Act, NDAA. At more than 1,800 pages, this bill contains
wins for our country, our military, and our servicemembers. It provides
a raise to all servicemembers, with an even bigger raise for junior
enlisted troops. It invests billions in needed military infrastructure
in Hawaii and throughout the Indo-Pacific region--investments that are
critical as we work to counter China's influence and support our allies
and partners in the region.
I am proud that it contains a provision I fought for to create a new
``major mishaps'' classification to ensure better oversight and
accountability of major incidents like the 2021 fuel spills at the Red
Hill fuel storage facility on Oahu, which impacted over 93,000 people.
All of these provisions and many more will support our military, our
servicemembers, and their families. In fact, our priority should be
supporting the men and women of our Armed Forces and their families,
and that includes making sure they have access to quality healthcare.
But instead of focusing on the things that matter, such as
healthcare, Republicans demanded the inclusion of a provision
prohibiting TRICARE from covering gender-affirming care for minors.
Despite efforts to stop this provision, to strip this provision from
this bill during conference, it is in there.
By many estimates, there are thousands of transgender children of
servicemembers who are currently receiving gender-affirming care from
TRICARE. Under this bill, those children would not be able to access
the healthcare they need despite their parents approving the care. We
know what happens when transgender and nonbinary children are refused
gender-affirming care. According to the Journal of Adolescent Health,
rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide all increase.
There is no question that this provision will cause concern for
servicemembers worrying about their children not getting the healthcare
they need, and of course this will cause trauma to servicemembers,
their children, and the entire family.
We didn't have to do this, Mr. President. We didn't have to impose
this cruelty on our servicemembers and their families. I thank Senator
Baldwin for introducing an amendment to stop this unnecessary, cruel
provision, to strip this provision from this bill--an amendment I and
others are proud to cosponsor. We know this fight is not over.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Baldwin for her
leadership on this issue, for helping us to focus on this threat to the
rights of Americans that is being propounded in this Defense bill. I
want to thank Senator Merkley.
I want to thank everyone who is joining with Senator Baldwin in this
fight because today we are considering the National Defense
Authorization Act, and embedded within its language would be a ban on
TRICARE coverage of gender-affirming care for children of
servicemembers in our country. If passed into law, it would be the
first anti-LGBTQ law passed by Congress in decades. Since the 1990s,
there has been no anti-LGBTQ law which has passed. If passed into law,
it would force thousands of members of the military to decide between
service to their country and guaranteeing their child can get the
healthcare they need.
This language was the product of a nationwide campaign against trans
rights--a campaign that has facilitated the harassment of teachers,
bomb threats to children's hospitals, and attacks on transgender
people. This is the same campaign that drives legislators from State
capitals to Capitol Hill to insist on dictating Americans' healthcare
decisions.
We have seen this playbook before. For decades, Republicans attacked
the right to abortion. They slowly chipped away, State by State, law by
law, and today there is no constitutional right to abortion. Now they
have turned their attention to servicemembers' families.
We must fight off efforts by politicians to force themselves into
exam rooms. They think they know better than trained healthcare
providers and patients. They do not. The only expertise they are
exhibiting is an expertise in the oppression, suppression, and
repression of healthcare freedom. And their attacks will not stop
there.
Freedom isn't lost all at once; it happens 1 inch at a time. As the
Senate author of the Transgender Bill of Rights, this is an inch that I
insist that we cannot give.
At its best, this institution has affirmed the rights of every
American. On this floor, we have expanded access to healthcare,
guaranteed Americans' civil rights, and protected same-sex marriage.
Today, we have the opportunity and the responsibility to fight
discriminatory attacks on servicemembers, their families, and their
healthcare providers.
We must strike this language. If we do not, we must vote no on the
entire bill.
To every trans American, every servicemember, and their families,
friends, and communities: I will not turn my back on you. I am with
you. Together, we will keep fighting.
So, again, I thank Senator Baldwin for her leadership on this issue.
With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleagues--Senator
Kim, Senator Hirono, and Senator Markey--for participating in this
debate today and for standing firm.
As I said earlier, historically, the NDAA has embodied the idea that
there is more that brings us together than separates us, that our
servicemembers and national defense are not to be politicized, and that
we put our country over party when the chips are on the table.
Unfortunately this year, that was ignored, all to gut the rights of
our servicemembers to get the healthcare that they need for their
children.
[[Page S7068]]
With that, I encourage a ``no'' vote on the NDAA.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Texas.
Unanimous Consent Request--S. 2082
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, it seems hard to imagine that it was 23
years ago when 3,000 Americans were killed in a terrorist attack in New
York City and here in Washington, DC, at the Pentagon.
The families who lost loved ones that day have been seeking access to
justice, just like any other victim could and should be able to here in
the United States.
To that end, we introduced the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism
Act, or JASTA, which was a monumental step to allowing those families
who lost loved ones to achieve long-overdue closure in a court of law.
It did not put our thumb on the scale, it didn't say they were
entitled to anything; it just said they were entitled to present their
arguments and the facts to a court of law just like any other American
citizen should be able to do so here in our country.
These terrorist attacks on 9/11 were a tragedy for our entire Nation;
but for some, that day was a personal tragedy as well. Men and women
who lost loved ones during the terrorist attacks deserve to have their
day in court. Thanks to JASTA, as it is called, the Justice against
Sponsors of Terrorism Act, that is now possible.
This legislation, the Ensuring Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act,
provides important updates and technical edits to the original bill.
To show you the sort of bipartisan support that this carve-out in
foreign sovereign immunity law received, it passed 97 to 1 back when it
originally passed, and it passed over a Presidential veto by President
Obama. The bill before us today does not expand JASTA's original scope
as intended by Congress, but it does correct certain judicial
misinterpretations that fly in the face of the clear text and the
history of this legislation.
When President Obama vetoed JASTA, leading to the only veto override
during his Presidency, he listed a parade of harmful potential foreign
policy outcomes to justify his refusal to stand up for American victims
of terrorism.
None--none--of these predicted negative outcomes have come to pass,
and JASTA has been the law of the land for nearly a decade. These
technical corrections will not change that fact. It will ensure that
the families of the victims of these tragic attacks on 9/11 receive the
justice they deserve, and I hope it will advance out of the Senate
today.
To that end, I would ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the
Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 2082 and,
notwithstanding rule XXII, that the Senate proceed to its immediate
consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time
and passed; and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and
laid on the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection?
The Senator from Arkansas.
Mr. COTTON. Reserving the right to object. I would first like to
begin by joining my colleague from Texas in mourning the loss of the
nearly 3,000 innocent Americans who died in the September 11 attack. We
must never--and we will never--forget them.
I also want to extend my prayers to families who lost loved ones that
day and who bear the weight of their loss in their hearts every single
day.
However, I must object to this bill today because it hasn't yet
received the careful consideration and deliberation that the subject
warrants. First, contrary to some suggestions, the bill would enact
more than mere technical corrections to earlier legislation. Rather,
the bill's provisions would significantly change how a highly technical
area of U.S. law is interpreted.
But the Judiciary Committee hasn't held a hearing or a vote on this
bill, not the fault of the Senator from Texas to be sure, but a fact,
nonetheless. I also question whether the Foreign Relations Committee
should evaluate the bill as well, given its consequences for our
foreign policy.
Second--and speaking of foreign policy--the bill could have far-
reaching and consequential implications for our policy in the Middle
East. Thanks to Israel's artful diplomacy and incredible military,
Iran's so-called ``axis of resistance'' lies in rubble in Gaza,
Lebanon, and Syria, with Iran itself, therefore, exposed on its flanks
for the first time in a generation.
I would suggest at this highly promising, yet highly sensitive moment
that all our efforts should be focused on uniting our friends and our
allies in the region to put an end, once and for all, to the threat of
a nuclear-armed, terrorist-sponsoring Iran.
Finally, this bill could have the unintended but unwelcome result of
further delaying resolution and recovery for the 9/11 litigants' cases.
The courts will likely need to reopen and relitigate past decisions
based on the changed law, while a disproportionate amount of any future
recovery could go primarily to insurance companies and lawyers instead
of the families of the victims--if any recovery comes at all.
For these reasons, I must object today while suggesting that the new
Congress revisit the matter with the hearings, regular order, and full
consideration that the subject deserves.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
____________________